#SupremeCourt to continue hearing the Jarnail Singh case wherein a constitution bench held that the issue relating to reservation in promotion has already been decided in Nagraj’s case & needs no reconsideration.
AG quotes a Delhi High Court Special Leave Petition where the 1997 memorandum was set aside: It was quashed on the ground that adequacy of representation was not looked into.
AG continues: Therefore, your Lordships will be pleased to know that even though you can pin point and say 2.5% are the occupied posts because of the roster based.. we are able from 65 onwards following this procedure where you have accuracy. There are 53 dept.s in the Union.
AG: The Counsel for Maharashtra told me that they have 6000 cadres. The centre has about 5000, if there are 53 dept and 5000 cadres before a selection is made, you have to go into quantifiable data which was done in Karnataka by a committee.
AG: Here we will have to go into each cadre, this exercise is inbuilt into the reservation. I have to explain how the average, how did that come about?
Justice Rao: We appreciate that roster points according to Sabarwal.. but at the ground level for a long number of years, those posts are not filled up, in such cases is there not a requirement for the State to take into account inadequacy of representation?
AG: It is a fact of life. In 75 years, we have not been able to bring the SCs and STs to the same level of merit. They are admitted at entry-level, thereafter there is no reservation.
The time has come to that so far as quantifiable data is concerned is not very concrete.
AG: The time has come for your Lordships to give a concrete basis for SCs STs and OBCs to fill up posts.
#SupremeCourt: We are not concerned with OBCs right now, this is reservation in promotions.
AG: In a roster system, automatically posts can get filled up. I sincerely say that Your Lordships may consider whether this is not an appropriate method.
AG: This may be a matter of policy for govt. to decide.. such as from a maintenance man to a clerk.
#SupremeCourt: According to your OA, there is no reservation for promotion in reservation within Group A. So, a person coming from C, will be entitled to B and even A, thereafter
AG: But he can’t get reservation for direct, and thereafter to junior or deputy secy. Efficiency is looked into.
#SupremeCourt: No, there cannot be over reservation.
This is data regarding initial joining as well as promotional posts. Do you have data for promotional post alone and secondly, what about data post 2017?
Singh: There is a comprehensive annual data by the DOPT. If we see..
#SupremeCourt: This pertains to 19 ministries. How many more are there?
Singh: If we look at departments etc. more than 5000. I will see, Milord. What I was trying to point out is, there is data available. SC in this case is 15.34 and ST is 6.18
Singh: there are three anomalies. The reserve category is being identified on merit. Second, group D there are higher occupancy that is going to bring the number higher up and general category promotions may be lower. Third, there may be certain depts where reserve number is high
#SupremeCourt: The problem with this is, the provision in the Constitution is that reservation in promotions is made for certain class or classes. If you solely go by this, then there is an imperative need to discontinue reservation in excess classes.
#SupremeCourt: If we accept the roster system applies, then there is a cap in reservation of promotion. If you come on the merit, fine. Then the question of adequacy will come in.
Singh: I think this is why the roster point system was identified.
#SupremeCourt: No, no. You are not correct. The roster stops after all these posts are filled up then there is a replacement theory. There is no need for any further exercise to be done, it is already in place.
ASG: If my data today reflects that there is inadequate representation..
#SupremeCourt: If we accept this reasoning, there will a problem. We are finding that in Grp. A, representation is low. Instead of correcting that, we are ensuring adequate representation in Grp B & C.
Therefore, where there is inadequate representation in A, you are saying we have satisfied the constitutional requirement by meeting the representation in B & C!
Patwalia: Every govt when it conducts the exercise, it calls for information, from evert dept. from each cadre.
It will always happen, like in Bihar, that in 99% cadres they were under-represented.
Patwalia: Second thing, person who comes on merit, not to be considered in reservation and Pavitra also accepts. In fact, much of your Lordships exercise has already been done by Pavitra.
Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan makes submissions, reads from Nagraj.
"In this regard the State concerned will have to show
in each case the existence of the compelling reasons,
namely, backwardness, inadequacy of representation and overall administrative efficiency before..."
Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan submits that there are other more recent judgments that he will come to after taking the Court through Nagaraj.
Sr. Adv. Dhavan: Class can only mean- classes between whom the Court or govt. is deciding. It has to come down to cadre, it cannot be grouped or general.
Sr. Adv. Dhavan: If it is only prospective, those people who’ve been fighting the case for several years, their interests will be prejudicially affected.
Sr. Adv. Dhavan: I have always taken the view that I am neither in favour of reservation nor merit and this is consistent with the Court’s view. Balance.. we have to maintain balance.
Sr. Adv. Dhavan: Consequential seniority is also an aspect Your Lordships should look at. Efficiency is not a narrow issue.
Reject an SC ST, and they are marginalised! This is not quite a correct reading of Article 335, its proviso and its purpose.
Sr. Adv. Dhavan summarises: No. 3, can’t be done by class or groups. Has to be done by cadre. If not, Your Lordship will have to overrule at least 16 decisions I have argued.
Sr. Adv. Dhavan summarises: Finally, Pavitra is a decision your Lordship might consider as inadequate data, premises, based on groups rather than cadres with a very wide width of retrospectivity and using the sampling method rather than the rigorous method.
Sr. Adv. Jaising: India’s constitution is unique in the world in providing reservation for services. In Indra Sawhney, the difference between reservation and affirmative action was explained.
Reservation is where you have separate ques, affirmative action is any other action in furtherance of introducing schemes towards equality such as scholarships etc. But if you read the Court’s judgments there is a confusion, explains Sr. Adv. Jaising.
Sr. Adv. Jaising: No state in India has made reservations in promotions after 2006, the reason being the Nagaraj judgement wanted quantifiable data. Everyone is struggling to understand what this means.
Sr. Adv. Jaising: 16(4) after all uses the word "representation" qualified by “adequate”. Why? Why do we have this right? Because it is a goal in itself in a democratic republic for moving towards an inclusive society. A society in which people share State power.
Sr. Adv. Jaising: The question has been raised on what basis one draws demographic figures. By law, there is a difference between a census and showing figures of representation in a cadre.
Sr. Adv. Jaising: One thing on periodicity. It occurs every 10 years for a reason, since in anthropological, sociological terms, 10 years is considered one generation.
Sr. Adv. Jaising: Where does that leave us? It has been repeatedly harped that Nagraj held that equality is a basic feature of the Constitution, I beg to differ.
Whatever was held in Kesavananda Bharati, I am willing to accept that.
Sr. Adv. Jaising: At the stage of making actual reservation, what is the unit? It is the cadre, I agree. The concern here is that I must not grab the benefit of what has gone to the unreserved category.
Sr. Adv. Jaising: Your Lordship has an onerous task before you. I only request, don’t foreclose the decision before taking into consideration all points of view.
Sankaranarayanan: Because you are upsetting the Constitutional balance, if it has to be sustained it must be a very clear exercise. Article 16 fell for consideration in Indira Sawhney.
The phraseology in 16 (4) is important and is almost identical to 16 (4)(a)
[Cruise ship drug case] Mumbai Court will shortly hear remand of #AryanKhan and 7 others arrested for alleged involvement in the #ncbraid conducted on a Mumbai-Goa cruise.
NCB will also be producing two new arrests for first remand; Achit Kumar, who is supposedly linked to #AryanKhan and a foreign national allegedly involved in international trafficking.
#SupremeCourt to hear a plea by BJP MP Subramanian Swamy seeking framing of guidelines to prevent huge NPAs @BJP4India@Swamy39
Dr Swamy: this matter arises after your observations on this issue, this plea deals with large cases and methods by which large number of NPAs do not occur again
SC: Dr Swamy how do we frame guidelines so that non performing assets do not occur? its for the legislature
Dr Swamy: This will be beneficial for everybody..
Justice Vikram Nath: RBI, Finance ministry has been issuing guidelines and policies are framed so that NPAs do not occur. there is no need for us to interfere in all of this
Justice DY Chandrachud led bench of #SupremeCourt to hear the challenge to 27% Reservation for OBC & 10% for EWS in All India Quota for PG Medical Courses #NEET@advocate_tanvi
Senior Adv Datar: counter has been filed and pleadings are complete.
Justice Chandrachud: How long will you take
Datar: 30 minutes to 45 minutes
SC: Let us take couple of small matters first
Criteria for reservations to AIQ seats a policy matter within govt domain: Centre tells #SupremeCourt.
[LIVE THREAD] Supreme Court to hear its suo motu case concerning Lakhimpur Kheri violence that left eight dead, including a group of farmers (RE- VIOLENCE IN LAKHIMPUR KHERI (UP) LEADING TO LOSS OF LIFE) #SupremeCourt#LakhimpurKheri#SuoMotu
A bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli will hear the matter post 10.30 am today #SupremeCourt#LakhimpurKheri
In the wake of the violence, two lawyers from Uttar Pradesh had written a letter to CJI NV Ramana seeking a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) #SupremeCourt#LakhimpurKheri
Sr Adv Vikas Singh for Unitech: how long will this ex parte hearing go on? I am the second-largest real estate developer who has built around 5 crore square feet area and over 1 lakh units
Justice DY Chandrachud: This is not an ex parte hearing. You are not entitled to peruse the case diary..
Sr Adv Vikas Singh: I don't want your lordships to repent later on that you did not take timely action. I am sure the court has nothing personal against the Chandras.
Justice MR Shah: these are just your defences..
Sr Adv Singh: i should have been given the Grant Thornton report. I should have been able to show that there is no diversion of funds